Bad Investment: The Philanthropy of George Soros and the Arab-Israeli Conflict How Soros-funded Groups Increase Tensions in a Troubled Region Alexander H. Joffe, Ph.D. May 2013 TABLE OF CONTENts 4 Executive Summary 6 Background on Foundations and Philanthropy in America 7 The Problems of Accountability and Transparency 8 Studying Foundations 10 George Soros and His Philanthropy 10 Soros and the “Open Society” 12 Soros on Politics, Judaism, and Israel 14 The Structure of George Soros’ Philanthropy 16 Key OSF Entities 16 Soros Family Foundations 17 Patterns of Giving 18 The Problem of the Swiss OSF Foundation 20 Large-Scale Soros Family Giving related to Jewish, Israel, Middle East, and Human Rights Issues 20 Human Rights Watch 23 J Street 28 Institute for Middle East Understanding 29 OSF Programs and Funding in Israel and the Middle East 29 The Middle East & North Africa Initiative and the Arab Regional Office 30 Open Society Justice Initiative 30 Funding in Israel 31 Student Grants 32 Problematic OSF Recipients 32 Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Rights in Israel 33 Al-Haq 34 Al-Mezan 34 B’Tselem 35 Breaking the Silence 35 Gisha 36 I’Lam: Media Center for Arab Palestinians in Israel 36 Ir Amim 37 Mada al-Carmel - Arab Center for Applied Social Research 37 Mossawa Center 38 New Israel Fund 38 Palestinian Center for Human Rights 39 Rabbis for Human Rights 39 Yesh Din, Volunteer for Human Rights 40 Other Controversial Recipients 40 AMIDEAST 40 Amnesty International 41 Avaaz 42 Center for Constitutional Rights 43 Crimes of War Project 43 National Iranian American Council 46 New America Foundation 48 Institute for Policy Studies 49 Kairos Project/Telos Group 50 Center for American Progress 51 Media Matters 52 US/Middle East Project 53 Conclusions 55 Appendices 55 Appendix One: Key Soros Fund Management and Schulte, Roth & Zabel personnel involved in Soros foundations 56 Appendix Two: Soros Fund Charitable Foundation grants to organizations involved in Jewish, Israeli and Middle Eastern affairs 2010 57 Appendix Three:Soros recipient NGOs and amounts received from Soros Foundations EXECUTIVE SUMMARY support for Israel by shifting public opin- ion regarding the Israeli-Palestinian con- George Soros, the Soros family, and the Open flict and Iran; Society Foundation network are among the 3. Funding for Israeli political opposition world’s largest philanthropists, with major impact groups on the fringes of Israeli society, on a global scale. This monograph provides a which use the rhetoric of human rights to detailed examination of these activities and advocate for marginal political goals. their effect in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Based on open-source data, including The first category comprises large and extensive tax-reporting documents from the givers and Open Society Foundation grants to Palestinian recipients, this report also analyzes the role of a organizations such as Al-Haq, Al-Mezan, and little-known and rather secretive branch of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, as well Open Society Foundation – the Open Society as Israeli political NGOs, including Yesh Din, Institute, based in Zug, Switzerland. Breaking the Silence, and Adalah. These groups are active in promoting the Durban strategy by The background for this report is the intensive attempting to portray Israel as a “racist” and campaign of delegitimization and political “apartheid state” that commits “war crimes.” 4 warfare targeting Israel, led by influential non- A primary goal of such demonizing language governmental organizations (NGOs), under is to isolate Israel internationally, leading to the banner of human rights and similar moral the implementation of sanctions. Many of objectives. Soros has been a frequent critic of page these NGO recipients are also leaders in the Israeli government policy, and does not consider T international boycott, sanctions, and divestment N himself a Zionist, but there is no evidence that (BDS) and “lawfare” campaigns, including the he or his family holds any special hostility or filing of international lawsuits aimed at harassing opposition to the existence of the state of Israel. Israeli officials. estme This report will show that their support, and that of the Open Society Foundation, has nevertheless This report also examines contributions NV I gone to organizations with such agendas. from Soros to international NGOs such as D D Human Rights Watch ($100 million)2 and Among the objectives of this report is to provide ba Amnesty International, both of which focus detailed and fully sourced information on disproportionate and biased attention on these activities, and to inform Soros and others Israel. The Soros gift to Human Rights Watch involved in his charitable activities about their came after a series of scandals, including fund- impact. raising in Saudi Arabia to promote its anti-Israel The evidence demonstrates that Open Society campaigns and support for the Ghaddafi family funding contributes significantly to anti-Israel as “human rights reformers.” Concurrently, campaigns in three important respects: founder Robert Bernstein publicly renounced Human Rights Watch, and a number of core 1. Active in the “Durban strategy;”1 donors also withdrew their support. 2. Funding aimed at weakening U.S. In the second category are organizations that aim to shift U.S. public opinion regarding the Israeli- 1 The “Durban strategy” was adopted by the NGO Forum of Palestinian conflict. The report examines the the 2001 UN Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa. The Final Declaration, based on language from the role of the Soros family in supporting U.S.-based Teheran preparatory conference, attacked Israel as an “apartheid organizations such as J Street, Media Matters, state” and called for “the imposition of mandatory and comprehensive sanctions and embargoes, the full cessation of the Center for American Progress, the National all links (diplomatic, economic, social, aid, military cooperation and training) between all states and Israel.” See also, G. M. 2 See “George Soros to Give $100 million to Human Rights Steinberg, “Soft Powers Play Hardball: NGOs Wage War against Watch,” Human Rights Watch, September 7, 2010 at http:// Israel,” Israel Affairs 12 (2006): 748–768. www.hrw.org/news/2010/09/07/global-challenge Iranian American Council (NIAC), and the along with Center for American Progress and Institute for Middle East Understanding. These Media Matters, are almost certainly known by groups share the goal of influencing American foundation leadership and the Soros family. In public opinion and leaders on Middle East this sense, the grants represent their intentions policy issues, and reducing domestic support and are expressions of their values. for Israel. NIAC seeks to enhance the public It is unclear whether or not Soros and his family standing of the Iranian regime and shield it from know of the Open Society Foundation’s role in efforts to prevent the illicit acquisition of nuclear supporting the global delegitimization of Israel. weapons. Soros recently said, “As I survey my foundations In the third category is funding for Israeli network, I cannot give a proper accounting of political opposition groups on the fringes of the far-reaching and varied activities going on Israeli society. This includes gifts to organizations inside because I am not aware of them all.3” such as Adalah, B’Tselem, Breaking the Silence, Yet, to what degree Soros, his family, and the Gisha, and Yesh Din. These organizations Open Society Foundation are aware of the promote a narrow, marginal political agenda that cumulative impact on Israel and of the political is far outside the Israeli consensus, often join in warfare conducted by many of their beneficiaries 5 promoting the Durban agenda, and in some cases is an open question. reject Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. Other grant recipients are large foundations, such as Recommendations: First, George Soros, the the New Israel Fund, which in turn support Soros family, and the Open Society Foundation page many of these same Israeli organizations. network should institute complete transparency, T in contrast to the secrecy outlined in this report. N In these funding policies, and in contrast Second, they should ensure that beneficiaries to the name and stated values of the Open act in strict accordance with the universal Society Foundation, the Soros family and the moral principles, and abstain from promoting estme recipient organizations often act in a manner totalitarian regimes such as in Iran, as well as NV that is inconsistent with the principles of I from participating in demonization of Israel transparency and accountability. Support for D through the exploitation of the language of Al-Haq, Adalah and other organizations is not ba fully transparent. The relationship of the Soros human rights. family and OSF leadership in New York to OSI-Zug is also opaque, but the involvement of senior Open Society Foundation officials Aryeh Neier and William Newton-Smith as OSI-Zug trustees suggests that the Swiss entity does not act independently. Similarly, the efforts to hide donations from the Soros family to J Street are far from consistent with the ideals of an “open society.” The extent of Soros’ and the Soros family’s awareness of the issues raised in this monograph is a matter of speculation. Though smaller grants are authorized by OSF staff, the large- scale OSF and Soros family grants to Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Institute for Middle East Understanding, 3 C. Sudetic, The Philosophy of George Soros, (New York Public Affairs, 2011), 36. BacKgroUND ON and public policy. These activities form part FOUNDatioNS AND of the ancestry of modern non-governmental organizations (NGOs).5 PhilaNthropY IN America After World War II, foundations assumed an even Individual philanthropy and charitable giving by more important role in America and emerging religious institutions goes back to the beginnings global civil society.